1. On December 27, 2016, the Defendant revoked the disposition of non-acceptance of building report filed with the Plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 26, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a building report, including an application for permission to engage in development activities, with respect to the instant land in the form of complex civil petitions, in order to newly build an animal and plant-related facility of a size of 2,133.14 square meters in total floor area (hereinafter “instant application site”) with respect to 2,509 square meters in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, C, 3,187 square meters in total, and 5,696 square meters in total (hereinafter “instant application site”).

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant report” and a certified architect newly constructed accordingly shall be deemed as the “instant certified architect”). B.

On December 27, 2016, the defendant issued a disposition not to grant the report of this case to the plaintiff for the following reasons according to the result of deliberation by the civil petition mediation committee in Kimcheon-si.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). Under Articles 56 (Permission for Development Acts, etc.) and 58 (Standards, etc. for Permission for Development Acts) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”), and operation guidelines for permission for development activities, a detached house has been constructed and resided in the surrounding areas; considering the actual use condition or land use plan, etc. of surrounding areas, such as a housing construction plan in the future; and due to the establishment of a stable case, the occurrence of environmental pollution, such as air quality, soil quality, etc., and concerns over the grouping of livestock pens; 【Ground for Recognition”; 【No dispute has occurred; 1 through 5 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply); and

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case is unlawful as a deviation or abuse of discretionary power for the following reasons.

1) The instant application does not fall under a zone where livestock raising is restricted, but is located far far away from 500 meters in a residential densely-populated area, and only one detached house is located in the neighboring area. (ii) There is no possibility of ordinarily anticipated environmental pollution due to the development of solar technology, and there is an up-to-date facility to the extent that the Plaintiff would expect the cost of new construction of the map 1.3 billion won. Accordingly, environmental pollution, such as air water quality, etc., is generated.